About post-mortem
post-mortem reviews strategic decisions against success and kill criteria set before the decision, and revisits recorded dissent. It is intended for teams tracking outcomes and learning from decisions over time.
Key features
- 01Scores pre-committed criteria against outcomes
- 02Revisits preserved dissent
- 03Uses decision and execution records
- 04Records outcome status
- 05Saves a post-mortem Markdown file
Use cases
- 01Reviewing a decision at its 90-day checkpoint
- 02Assessing a decision after a kill criterion triggers
- 03Evaluating quarterly decisions against outcomes
Install
Copy the command and run it in a terminal.
npx skills add https:/After installing, type/post-mortemin Claude Code to confirm it loaded.
Details
From the project README/c-level-agents:post-mortem — Honest Retrospective
Command: /c-level-agents:post-mortem <decision-path>
Closes the strategic sprint loop. Scores a decision against the success and kill criteria written before the decision (not retro-fitted) and revisits the preserved dissent. This is the rigor that compounds over time.
Pipeline Position
/c-level-agents:office-hours → /c-level-agents:brief → /c-level-agents:boardroom → /c-level-agents:decide → /c-level-agents:execute → /c-level-agents:post-mortem
↑ you are here
When to Run
- At the 90-day checkpoint (auto-scheduled by
/c-level-agents:decide) - When a kill criterion triggers
- After a major decision is reversed
- Quarterly on all decisions of the past quarter
Inputs
- The decision record (output of
/c-level-agents:decide) - The execution plan (output of
/c-level-agents:execute) - Actual outcomes (metrics, events, customer signals)
Output: Post-Mortem Record
Saved to ~/.claude/postmortems/YYYY-MM-DD-<slug>.md:
# Post-Mortem: <decision title>
**Decision date:** YYYY-MM-DD
**Post-mortem date:** YYYY-MM-DD
**Status:** WIN / PARTIAL / LOSS / MIXED
## Outcome Scoring (against pre-committed criteria)
| Success Criterion | Threshold | Actual | Met? |
|---|---|---|---|
| <metric 1> | <threshold> | <actual> | ✅ / ❌ |
| <metric 2> | <threshold> | <actual> | ✅ / ❌ |
| Kill Criterion | Threshold | Actual | Triggered? |
|---|---|---|---|
| <metric> | <threshold> | <actual> | ✅ / ❌ |
**Overall:** WIN / PARTIAL / LOSS / MIXED
## What We Got Right
- <factor 1>
- <factor 2>
## What We Got Wrong
- <factor 1>
- <factor 2>
## Preserved Dissent — Revisited
[Original dissent from the boardroom memo, scored:]
- **<dissenter>:** <original concern>
- **Did it materialize?** YES / NO / PARTIAL
- **Cost if YES:** <quantified impact>
- **Lesson:** <one sentence>
## Assumption Audit
[Original brief's assumptions, scored:]
- **Assumption 1:** <text>
- **Held?** YES / NO / PARTIAL
- **Why:** <explanation>
## Process Lessons
- **Phase 2 isolation worked?** YES / NO
- **Devil's advocate concerns played out?** YES / NO / PARTIAL
- **Cadence was right?** YES / TOO LOOSE / TOO TIGHT
## Forward Actions
- [ ] <change to operating system or routing logic>
- [ ] <new decision to make based on this learning>
- [ ] <update company-context.md>
## Status
- WIN → archive, log lesson
- LOSS → schedule follow-up boardroom: `/c-level-agents:brief` for the next call
Why Pre-Committed Criteria Matter
The biggest temptation in post-mortems is retroactive justification: "we always knew X, that's why we did Y." Pre-committed criteria, signed at /c-level-agents:decide time, eliminate that move. The numbers either matched or they didn't.
Why Revisit Dissent
The dissent column from /c-level-agents:boardroom is the single most useful piece of organizational memory. Most of the time, the dissenter was directionally right. Revisiting and scoring it builds calibration over years.
Routing
/c-level-agents:brief— if the post-mortem surfaces a new decision/c-level-agents:freeze— if the post-mortem reveals a process gap that needs cooldown enforcement- Updates to company-context.md via
cs-onboard
Related
- Skill:
decision-logger - Agent:
cs-chief-of-staff - Sibling:
/em:postmortem— adversarial single-decision post-mortem
Version: 1.0.0